Printable View
Well, he obviously didn't write that himself, and I think he speech writer took the same classes as Alex Rodriguez's, cause as I'm reading it I swear I've heard it before. Anyways, quite a mess.Quote:
Originally Posted by pbmax
Has an individual player sued the NFL before? I don't remember ever seeing it happen.
Brady may face uphill battle on cell phone destruction if this anonymous lawyer is right:
http://www.atlredline.com/no-destroy...kay-1720689663
He is required to preserve evidence, even in anticipation of civil litigation is that litigation is reasonably foreseeable:
Apparently, this lawyer is not anonymous:Quote:
In Brady’s case, his or the NFLPA’s attorneys will have to argue that litigation was somehow not reasonably foreseeable or anticipated despite every sports show talking head predicting that this situation would end up in court from the first day of the scandal. It seems highly implausible that a reasonable person in Brady’s situation would not foresee litigation and not think to preserve a cellphone after receiving multiple prior requests for it.
In addition, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(e) states that:
Absent exceptional circumstances, a court may not impose sanctions under these rules on a party for failing to provide electronically stored information lost as a result of the routine, good-faith operation of an electronic information system.
Once again, Brady will try to argue that he routinely destroyed cell phones and that it was a giant coincidence that he happened to get rid of thousands of relevant messages on the same day investigators interviewed him.
Steve Silver is the founder of TheLegalBlitz.com. He is a former sports reporter for the Las Vegas Sun and is now a lawyer in Philadelphia. You can reach him at steve@thelegalblitz.com or on Twitter @thelegalblitz.
I don't think Goodell could increase the penalty during the appeals process.Quote:
Originally Posted by MadScientist
I was under the impression Wells asked Brady to have his attorneys go over the texts and submit only pertinent communications germane to the investigation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joemailman
Robert Kraft:
If the NFL had been given the cell phones of Patriots employees Brady had corresponded with, I'm wondering why they needed Brady's cell phone.Quote:
"Yesterday's decision by Commissioner Goodell was released in a similar matter, under an erroneous headline that read: 'Tom Brady destroyed his cell phone,'" he said. "This headline was designed to capture headlines across the country and obscure evidence regarding the tampering of air pressure in footballs. It intentionally implied nefarious behavior and minimized the acknowledgement that Tom provided the history of every number he texted during that relevant time frame and we had already provided the league with every cell phone of every non-NFLPA employee that they requested, including head coach Bill Belichick."
Burners and personal phones. They know the texts from his old cell to the numbers they have in their possession, but he could have been communicating to phones the NFL is unaware of.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joemailman
Its really second level stuff. And that's why I think the NFL leaked it, because it looks like tampering with evidence (may indeed be) even if the likelihood of pertinent data on it was low.
Brady provided list of calls and texts made by Brady over the destroyed phone. NFL thought it not practical to contact each of 10,000 total communications, but ...
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/writer/...cience-is-junkQuote:
Yee said that of the parties pertinent or potentially pertinent to this case, there were just 10 teammates, two current coaches, five former teammates, one NFL Network employee, five members of New England's "front office" and five other Patriots' employees who had phone or text contact with Brady (which brings the total number to 28).
Brady is an idiot. Goodell is a weasel.
Really 4 months not a normal upgrade cycle? He's fucking rich, and probably has someone that does all the bullshit stuff for him. Why wouldn't he want to upgrade, new phones come out so fast that you could easily upgrade every 4 months. I'm not saying he didn't destroy it to hide something, but normal logic does not apply to filthy rich people.Quote:
Originally Posted by MadScientist
I'm starting to think this suspension has less to do with Brady's supposed involvement with deflating footballs and more to do with sending a message to NFL players that when the NFL asks for your personal information you had better provide exactly what they ask for. Or else.
He also went from Android to iOS (iOS to Android?). I've known people who've gone in one direction or the other in less than 4 months after getting a new phone.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutnstrut
All of this crap just leads me to believe that the next CBA agreement is going to involve a LENGTHY holdout by the players...because Goodell's heavy handed and confusing way of dealing out punishment is not winning over the players.
Same here, hell I have friends that pay full full price to "upgrade" 3 or 4 times a year. Just so they can say they have the latest and greatest, and they are far from millionaires.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guiness
I'd say +1...but they really seemed lined up to hold out this past time and caved at the 11th hour. I think the nature of the sport - young man's game, outside of QB's a very limited amount of earning years and fungibility of the journeymen class player, a new crop of players available every 12 months, really lowers the possibility of the union putting up a good fight.Quote:
Originally Posted by King Friday
ProFootballTalk @ProFootballTalk 9h9 hours ago
Tom Brady's agent tells @tomecurran that NFL's shift in message to "destroyed" cell phone was expected http://wp.me/p14QSB-9Ouc
I suggest you read it. Because while there are some good nuggets of info, the word tortured does come to mind.
Tom Curran writes that the man who seems responsible for initiating the investigation of the Patriots for deflate gate was a Jets employee until Eric Mangini was hired as head coach.
http://www.csnne.com/new-england-pat...ategate-source
Albert Breer @AlbertBreer
From Brady suit: "The purportedly independent Wells Report was edited by Pash, the NFL's General Counsel, before its public release."
Looks to me like the NFL wins this one. The union's primary argument is that the arbitrator is biased. Arbitrator was agreed upon by the league and Brady via the CBA long ago. Doty would have gone against legal precedent to help out the labor, but the NY judge probably won't. Brady agreed to binding arbitration AND agreed to having it be levied by Goodell. He should have taken a deal. He's toast.
The NFLPA has won the last two battles over Personal Conduct because of due process, not bias. For Rice, the Judge (not Doty) ruled that Commissioner Hairbrain was not lied to, but failed to understand what a punch might mean in the context of domestic violence. Without the video, he failed to imagine that it could be as severe as the video indicated. The Judge found this failure of comprehension to be consistent with the NFL's admitted failure to take the issue seriously, resulting in the new Policy.Quote:
Originally Posted by smuggler
The also lost on a second angle with Rice when they got stopped from applying a new rue after the fact.
Doty found that the same rulings applied to Peterson.
Brady's case, as argued by the NFLPA, is being contested on four points:http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...-in-minnesota/
1. Players advance notice of potential discipline. “Brady had no notice of the disciplinary standards that would be applied,” the petition says at page 3, “and no notice of the potential penalties.”
2. The league and the NFLPA collectively bargained the punishment for “alleged equipment tampering by players,” and that the NFL was not permitted to disregard those provisions without advance notice.
3. The petition likewise explains that the “Competitive Integrity Policy” was “never given” to players, and that it specifically applies only to teams, not to players.
4. A fine is the only penalty that has ever been upheld in such circumstances.” (In 2010, Brett Favre was fined $50,000 for failing to cooperate with an investigation regarding allegations that he texted inappropriate photos to a Jets employee.)
5. The petition claims that the discipline violates the “law of the shop” that requires fair and consistent treatment of players by basing Brady’s discipline on air-pressure tests that “did not generate reliable information,” and that the arbitrator (Commissioner Roger Goodell) was “evidently partial.”
Regarding #3, a Jets player, a kicker, was not subject to punishment despite being generally aware of tampering with the K balls by the Jets equipment staff in 2009.
Doty's rulings were contrary to legal precedent and taken to higher court to continue litigation. The league and Goodell pooped thw bed with Rice's case, but it doesn't have any bearing on the Brady case, as far as I can see.
You might be able to find one or some of his rulings that the NFL claims were contrary to legal precedent, but not Peterson's.Quote:
Originally Posted by smuggler
Quote:
The 16-page ruling from Judge David Doty that reinstates Vikings running back Adrian Peterson turns on one fairly simple conclusion: The NFL cannot apply its new personal conduct policy retroactively.
“There is no dispute that the Commissioner imposed Peterson’s discipline under the New Policy,” Judge Doty wrote. “It is also undisputed that in the [Ray] Rice arbitration, the hearing officer unequivocally recognized that the New Policy cannot be applied retroactively, notwithstanding the Commissioner’s broad discretion in meting out punishment under the CBA. . . . Consistent with that recognition, the Commissioner has acknowledged that he did not have the power to retroactively apply the New Policy: ‘The policy change was forward looking because the League is “required to provide proper notice.”‘ . . . Yet, just two weeks later, the Commissioner retroactively applied the New Policy to Peterson.”
In other words, Judge Doty concluded that the NFL was making it up as went along.